Search

A common and potent consideration has recently entered the landscape of the novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19): venous thromboembolism (VTE). COVID-19 has been associated to a distinctive related coagulopathy that shows unique characteristics. The research community has risen to the challenges posed by this « evolving COVID-19 coagulopathy » and has made unprecedented efforts to promptly address its distinct characteristics. In such difficult time, both national and international societies of thrombosis and hemostasis released prompt and timely responses to guide recognition and management of COVID-19-related coagulopathy. However, latest guidelines released by the international Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) on May 27, 2020, followed the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) on June 2, 2020 showed some discrepancies regarding thromboprophylaxis use. In this forum article, we would like to offer an updated focus on thromboprophylaxis with current incidence of VTE in ICU and non-ICU patients according to recent published studies; highlight the main differences regarding ISTH and CHEST guidelines; summarize and describe which are the key ongoing RCTs testing different anticoagulation strategies in patients with COVID-19; and finally set a proposal for COVID-19 coagulopathy specific risk factors and dedicated trials.

Many aspects of care such as management of hypercoagulable state in COVID-19 patients, especially those admitted to intensive care units is challenging in the rapidly evolving pandemic of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We seek to systematically review the available evidence regarding the anticoagulation approach to prevent venous thromboembolism (VTE) among COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units. Electronic databases were searched for studies reporting venous thromboembolic events in patients admitted to the intensive care unit receiving any type of anticoagulation (prophylactic or therapeutic). The pooled prevalence (and 95% confidence interval [CI]) of VTE among patients receiving anticoagulant were calculated using the random-effects model. Subgroup pooled analyses were performed with studies reported prophylactic anticoagulation alone and with studies reported mixed prophylactic and therapeutic anticoagulation. We included twelve studies (8 Europe; 2 UK; 1 each from the US and China) in our systematic review and meta-analysis. All studies utilized LMWH or unfractionated heparin as their pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, either prophylactic doses or therapeutic doses. Seven studies reported on the proportion of patients with the previous history of VTE (range 0-10%). The pooled prevalence of VTE among ICU patients receiving prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation across all studies was 31% (95% CI 20-43%). Subgroup pooled analysis limited to studies reported prophylactic anticoagulation alone and mixed (therapeutic and prophylactic anticoagulation) reported pooled prevalences of VTE of 38% (95% CI 10-70%) and 27% (95% CI 17-40%) respectively. With a high prevalence of thromboprophylaxis failure among COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units, individualised rather than protocolised VTE thromboprophylaxis would appear prudent at interim.

In December 2019, a new and highly contagious infectious disease emerged in Wuhan, China. The etiologic agent was identified as a novel coronavirus, now known as Severe Acute Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Recent research has revealed that virus entry takes place upon the union of the virus S surface protein with the type I transmembrane metallo-carboxypeptidase, angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) identified on epithelial cells of the host respiratory tract. Virus triggers the synthesis and release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-6 and TNF-α and also promotes downregulation of ACE-2, which promotes a concomitant increase in levels of angiotensin II (AT-II). Both TNF-α and AT-II have been implicated in promoting overexpression of tissue factor (TF) in platelets and macrophages. Additionally, the generation of antiphospholipid antibodies associated with COVID-19 may also promote an increase in TF. TF may be a critical mediator associated with the development of thrombotic phenomena in COVID-19, and should be a target for future study.

The outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has now become a global pandemic. Coagulopathy has been reported widely in critically ill COVID-19 patients and was related to high mortality. However, the comprehensive coagulation profiles have not been examined and the underlying mechanism of the coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients is unclear. To study the coagulation profiles of routine hemostasis tests, natural anticoagulants, coagulant factors and antiphospholipid antibodies in critically ill COVID-19 patients. This single-center and cross-section study included 19 patients with COVID-19, who were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) at Tongji hospital in Wuhan, China, from Feb 23 to Mar 3, 2020. Demographic data, laboratory parameters, treatments and clinical outcomes of the patients were collected and analyzed. The final date of follow-up was Mar 31, 2020. In this study, 12 thrombotic events occurred in 9 patients, including 4 cerebral infarctions, 7 acro-ischemia and 1 internal jugular vein thrombosis. The common abnormalities of routine coagulation tests included evelated D-Dimer level (100%), prolonged prothrombin time (73.7%) and hyperfibrinogenemia (73.7%). The median activities of natural anticoagulants including protein C, protein S and antithrombin were all below the normal range. Factor VIII activities were significantly above normal range (median value 307%, IQR 198-441) in all patients. Factor V and factor VII activities were significantly lower in near-terminal stage patients. Anti-phospholipid antibodies were present in 10 patients. Strikingly, 4 cerebral infarction events were in patients had anti-phospholipid antibodies of multiple isotypes. Sustained hypercoagulable status and thrombotic events were common in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The low activities of natural anticoagulants, elevated factor VIII level and the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies, together, may contribute to the etiopathology of coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients.

In the recent outbreak of novel coronavirus infection worldwide, the risk of thrombosis and bleeding should be concerned. We aimed to observe the dynamic changes of D-dimer levels during disease progression to evaluate their value for thrombosis. In this study, we report the clinical and laboratory results of 57 patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia and 46 patients with confirmed community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CAP). And their concentrations of D-dimer, infection-related biomarkers, and conventional coagulation were retrospectively analyzed. The Padua prediction score is used to identify patients at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). The results found that, on admission, both in COVID-19 patients and CAP patients, D-dimer levels were significantly increased, and compared with CAP patients, D-dimer levels were higher in COVID-19 patients (P  < 0.05). Besides, we found that in COVID-19 patients, D-dimer were related with markers of inflammation, especially with hsCRP (R = 0.426, P < 0.05). However, there was low correlation between VTE score and D-dimer levels (Spearman's R = 0.264, P > 0.05) weakened the role of D-dimer in the prediction of thrombosis. After treatments, D-dimer levels decreased which was synchronous with hsCRP levels in patients with good clinical prognosis, but there were still some patients with anomalous increasing D-dimer levels after therapy. In conclusion, elevated baseline D-dimer levels are associated with inflammation but not with VTE score in COVID-19 patients, suggesting that it is unreasonable to judge whether anticoagulation is needed only according to D-dimer levels. However, the abnormal changes of D-dimer and inflammatory factors suggest that anticoagulant therapy might be needed.

COVID-19 is associated with a variety of clinical complications including coagulopathy, which frequently results in venous thromboembolism (VTE). Retrospective analyses reported a markedly increased rate of VTEs in COVID-19. However, most recent studies on coagulopathy in COVID-19 were only focused on critically ill patients, and without suitable control groups. We aimed to evaluate the rate of VTEs in an all-comers cohort with suspected COVID-19 during a 30-days follow-up period. We also studied the level of D-dimers and their association with the course of disease. In our prospective single-center study (DRKS00021206, 03/30/2020), we analyzed 190 patients with suspected COVID-19 admitted to the emergency department between March and April 2020. Forty-nine patients were SARS-CoV-2 positive (25.8%). The 141 SARS-CoV-2-negative patients served as control group. After completion of a 30-days follow-up, VTE was diagnosed in 3 patients of the SARS-CoV-2-positive group (6.1%, amongst these 2 ICU cases) versus 5 patients in the SARS-CoV-2-negative group (3.5%), however the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.427). 30-days mortality was similar in both groups (6.1% vs. 5%, p = 0.720). Disease severity correlated with the maximum level of D-dimers during follow-up in COVID-19. The rate of VTE was numerically higher in SARS-CoV-2 positive all-comers presenting with suspected COVID-19 as compared to well-matched controls suffering from similar symptoms. VTEs in the COVID-19 group predominantly occurred in ICU courses. The maximum level of D-dimers during follow-up was associated with disease severity in COVID-19, whereas the level of D-dimers at admission was not.

Patients with COVID-19 have a coagulopathy and high thrombotic risk. In a cohort of 69 intensive care unit (ICU) patients we investigated for evidence of heparin resistance in those that have received therapeutic anticoagulation. 15 of the patients have received therapeutic anticoagulation with either unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), of which full information was available on 14 patients. Heparin resistance to UFH was documented in 8/10 (80%) patients and sub-optimal peak anti-Xa following therapeutic LMWH in 5/5 (100%) patients where this was measured (some patients received both anticoagulants sequentially). Spiking plasma from 12 COVID-19 ICU patient samples demonstrated decreased in-vitro recovery of anti-Xa compared to normal pooled plasma. In conclusion, we have found evidence of heparin resistance in critically unwell COVID-19 patients. Further studies investigating this are required to determine the optimal thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 and management of thrombotic episodes.

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia suffered both high thrombotic and bleeding risk. The effect of SARS-CoV-2 on coagulation and fibrinolysis is not well known. We conducted a retrospective study of critically ill patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) a cause of severe COVID-19 pneumonia and we evaluated coagulation function using rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) on day of admission (T0) and 5 (T5) and 10 (T10) days after admission to ICU. Coagulation standard parameters were also evaluated. Forty patients were enrolled into the study. The ICU and the hospital mortality were 10% and 12.5%, respectively. On ICU admission, prothrombin time was slightly reduced and it increased significantly at T10 (T0 = 65.1 ± 9.8 vs T10 = 85.7 ± 1.5, p = 0.002), while activated partial thromboplastin time and fibrinogen values were higher at T0 than T10 (32.2 ± 2.9 vs 27.2 ± 2.1, p = 0.017 and 895.1 ± 110 vs 332.5 ± 50, p = 0.002, respectively); moreover, whole blood thromboelastometry profiles were consistent with hypercoagulability characterized by an acceleration of the propagation phase of blood clot formation [i.e., CFT below the lower limit in INTEM 16/40 patients (40%) and EXTEM 20/40 patients (50%)] and significant higher clot strength [MCF above the upper limit in INTEM 20/40 patients (50%), in EXTEM 28/40 patients (70%) and in FIBTEM 29/40 patients (72.5%)]; however, this hypercoagulable state persists in the first five days, but it decreases ten day after, without returning to normal values. No sign of secondary hyperfibrinolysis or sepsis induced coagulopathy (SIC) were found during the study period. In six patients (15%) a deep vein thrombosis and in 2 patients (5%) a thromboembolic event, were found; 12 patients (30%) had a catheter-related thrombosis. ROTEM analysis confirms that patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia had a hypercoagulation state that persisted over time.

This study investigates the association between the treatment with heparin and mortality in patients admitted with Covid-19. Routinely recorded, clinical data, up to the 24th of April 2020, from the 2075 patients with Covid-19, admitted in 17 hospitals in Spain between the 1st of March and the 20th of April 2020 were used. The following variables were extracted for this study: age, gender, temperature, and saturation of oxygen on admission, treatment with heparin, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, steroids, tocilizumab, a combination of lopinavir with ritonavir, and oseltamivir, together with data on mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate the associations. At the time of collecting the data, 301 patients had died, 1447 had been discharged home from the hospitals, 201 were still admitted, and 126 had been transferred to hospitals not included in the study. Median follow up time was 8 (IQR 5-12) days. Heparin had been used in 1734 patients. Heparin was associated with lower mortality when the model was adjusted for age and gender, with OR (95% CI) 0.55 (0.37-0.82) p = 0.003. This association remained significant when saturation of oxygen < 90%, and temperature > 37 °C were added to de model with OR 0.54 (0.36-0.82) p = 0.003, and also when all the other drugs were included as covariates OR 0.42 (0.26-0.66) p < 0.001. The association between heparin and lower mortality observed in this study can be acknowledged by clinicians in hospitals and in the community. Randomized controlled trials to assess the causal effects of heparin in different therapeutic regimes are required.